User talk:Peteparker
Welcome to Horror Film Wiki! Greetings Peteparker! Welcome to Horror Film Wiki. Thank you for . If you have any questions or suggestions, just contact a sysop through their talk page or post your question on the community portal, and they'd be happy to help. If you need help editing, check the Help contents. Please remember to sign your name on, and only on, talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field as this helps to document all of your hard work. Feel free to delete this message from your talk page if you like, or keep it for reference. }--Notmyhandle 10:19, 25 October 2008 (UTC) Help Hey thanks a lot for all the contributions. I haven't really planned out much for this wiki, but I've been trying to build up some of the content as well as some of the organization at the same time. I could really use some help with rebuilding and expanding the front page, and also fixing some of the extra CSS (category area, page histories/diffs, etc.) for Monaco. --Notmyhandle 10:19, 25 October 2008 (UTC) :Thanks for updating me on the wiki integration. I can tell you that most of the stuff was copied from Wikipedia (especially the images; notice duplicate file names and metadata). I really like the new front page (well, the old one didn't really count xD), thanks for taking care of that. If you could change the top area to blood red, that would be awesome (at least temporarily, I just want to see how it looks). I'll just go through and fix some stuff for the css every once in a while (such as the white areas on the front page that shouldn't be there, and the "Request a new wiki" link at the top that is black on grey at the moment). --Notmyhandle 18:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC) Copying info Hi Pete. I'm not sure what you're used to, but as this is a GFDL wiki, all info you submit that has been copied (including images) must contain attribution (author or source). Citing the source is obviously better because then people can skip having to research the authors themselves. Anyways, next time just throw a link in the image summary or the url of the website you got it from (including Wikipedia). Thanks, --Notmyhandle 07:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC) CSS Actually I'd be down with switching to black. I just copied a dark template from another site to get the new look started, and it was missing a lot of the stuff apparently (like the Category boxes). --Notmyhandle 04:41, 27 October 2008 (UTC) :Also, for the black background, I think an offwhite color would be best to reduce the contrast. White on black is pretty powerful. After we make those general changes (background/font) we can re-modify the wikia logo (right now the contrast is bad, we'll probably want it a little brighter). --Notmyhandle 04:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC) New page buttons First: these are a great idea, and I'm glad you've gone ahead and initiated their existence. Second: I don't believe welcome messages are necessary for new page buttons, nor for new viewers. If a newly registered user creates a new page, they'll see these buttons which will make no sense. If anonymous editing is available, they too will have no real use for it. Message templates should remain fairly hidden, and mostly just sysops and regular contributors should be aware of them. Third: instead of having message templates, we should have new page buttons that coincide with the different types of pages that exist on this wiki. For example, we primarily have Films, Characters, and Series pages (and some categories). Thus, our first few new page template buttons should be for "Film", "Character", "Series", etc. I think for now Film and Character would be wise, until we come up with a good way of displaying series. Fourth: unrelated, what is your opinion of categories? Should they contain minimized content, or should the category page act also as the info page? For example, a category for a director could contain information on the director, or if left blank, just the films that the director directed. In the case of a blank category, an alternate page must exist for the information (i.e. Wes Craven versus Category:Wes Craven). --Notmyhandle 08:08, 29 October 2008 (UTC) :1 & 2) I see. Well, I guess I have no problem with it. However, it's debatable whether or not welcoming IPs is a good thing. Primarily because IPs change, therefore one IP should really have multiple welcomes (which doesn't make sense). I think it's better to leave that out, and urge anons to register instead. :3) Yeah, we still need to come up with a standardized look to articles (primarily the infobox and preferred layout for content). should be used for that. :4) I don't think changing the title is a good idea, because it just forces people to know the site better. For example, I browse most wikis by modifying the URL rather than searching or whatever. Names should just be left as is. In the past I have preferred combining category pages with the topic's contents, however they can get very long with the category section at the bottom, and the content, if long, can overshadow the listing. Therefore, I vote for split content pages for the sake of cleanliness. These content pages should have a notice at the top that links to the category, and of course, the category will contain the content page as well. We also have to remember that some of these pages will cover topics somewhat outside of our scope (such as people). I've been avoiding making actor pages, and the only staff I think are important are directors and writers. ::Again to recap, we can either combine and risk too much content, or split the content from the category and complicate locating information (although one click has never hurt anyone). :5) Looks good to me. --Notmyhandle 21:47, 31 October 2008 (UTC) Anon Edits I think we should go ahead and disable anonymous edits. It should improve communication, wikia involvement, and prevent some vandalism. --Notmyhandle 09:23, 5 November 2008 (UTC)